*Joins the mob* yea they are too lazy to get their act together, whose got the pitforks... ok sorry getting carried away.

In all seriousness, it does absolutely no good when a vendor tells you you need to turn it off. All the protection it provides goes up in smoke, then you have to consider that it may cause problems with programs you may run that were properly coded to work with UAC. It's a bloody headache. Vendors need to get with the program.

WOW just starting to jump on the Windows 7 bandwagon here and going from XP to this has been enough of a learning curve that this whole UAC thing seems silly. Maybe there will one day be a way to get it working. But I guess this is the new... All users must be admins for this program to work line.

You will encounter that, but there have been workarounds to run individual programs as admin while the user themselves is not an admin. I will say this though all of my users are local admins for simplicity sake, we were early Win 7 adopters) and I have not had any major issues with naughty software getting installed.

UAC isn't silly, actually its useful. Very useful. The problem isn't UAC, the problem is with stupid vendors not wanting to follow the standards microsoft puts in place. Half of the time windows gets compromised or blue screens is because of vendor software. Most vendor software is junk.

UAC isn't silly, actually its useful. Very useful. The problem isn't UAC, the problem is with stupid vendors not wanting to follow the standards microsoft puts in place. Half of the time windows gets compromised or blue screens is because of vendor software. Most vendor software is junk.

Sorry let me clarify. I wasn't meaing that the UAC was silly. The issues with the UAC and how it seems every one wants you to disable it are silly. Like the old line of all users must be admins.

I am one of those that loves UAC. Your vendors say that you need to turn UAC off because it is the easiest solution, but if you understand which hooks they are tapping into you can just allow those hooks through. Part of it is shotty programing, the other part is under education. If you read up on UAC and how to actually administer it you may find that it is very useful.

UAC isn't silly, actually its useful. Very useful. The problem isn't UAC, the problem is with stupid vendors not wanting to follow the standards microsoft puts in place. Half of the time windows gets compromised or blue screens is because of vendor software. Most vendor software is junk.

I am one of those that loves UAC. Your vendors say that you need to turn UAC off because it is the easiest solution, but if you understand which hooks they are tapping into you can just allow those hooks through. Part of it is shotty programing, the other part is under education. If you read up on UAC and how to actually administer it you may find that it is very useful.

+83459734985734985 for not disabling and not giving her users rights and understanding between black and white. I can't believe he was the only one that said it.

I am one of those that loves UAC. Your vendors say that you need to turn UAC off because it is the easiest solution, but if you understand which hooks they are tapping into you can just allow those hooks through. Part of it is shotty programing, the other part is under education. If you read up on UAC and how to actually administer it you may find that it is very useful.

+83459734985734985 for not disabling and not giving her users rights and understanding between black and white. I can't believe he was the only one that said it.

My personal opinion is that if the application does not support UAC, then it is not Vista/Win 7 compliant.

As others have said, it is laziness on the part of the developer for not learning how to be compliant with new technology.

As an example, If you bought a piece of software, and the vendor required you to turn off your anti-virus or firewall to get it to work (effectively leaving the system wide open to attack), would you see a problem with this? Turning off UAC is the same thing, they are asking you to comprimise the built in security of the OS, just to run their program which should have been written properly in the first place.

Sorry for the rant, I just don't agree with comprimising security for compatability.

Lets put it this way. If a vendor turned round and said you cant have an AV installed because it will stop their software working, would you uninstall the AV or tell them to get it sorted out? Like momurda said, this is the same as sudo and is there to save your ass. For years it has been too easy to install stuff on Windows and this is an attempt to make it better. Windows is secure, its the squidgy bit pocking the keyboard that isnt.